Sound the evolutionary-psychology bullsh*t klaxon! I don’t even know where to begin. Maybe it’s yet another attempt to excuse the ogling of women? Maybe it’s the use of Chatroulette and Girls Gone Wild as evidence? Maybe it’s the brazen, sweeping gender statements with nary a supporting link in sight?

A strong contender for the worst piece about science journalism this year, appearing in, of all places, the Atlantic. Apparently, all news outlets rely on press releases to understand science? Really? And journalists who actually do their jobs are nay-saying trouble-makers who have the temerity to not rely on press releases. And finally, we need bullsh*t science journalism to get the meaty “contrarian” stuff! This piece isn’t just stupid, but it’s a blanket excusal for future stupidity.

Comments (1)

It’s interesting that you sound the bullsh*t klaxon on the evolutionary psychology link and yet don’t do the same on the very next link to a preview in Nature about a research article which claims that great ideas come when you aren’t trying.

At the moment, the neuroscience and experimental psychology of creativity are fields that need to be treated with the same high levels of suspicion and skepticism as evolutionary psychology. The researchers who conduct the experiments, and the science writers who report on them, have been tirelessly bringing unsupported assumptions and biases to the research, and have, with the conclusions, been making totally unwarranted extrapolations and generalisations. All of this gives lay readers a completely false impression of what our scientific knowledge can teach us (certainly NOT anything like “great ideas come when we aren’t trying”), and it’s damaging to the reputation of this kind of science.